Originally Posted by NadalAgassi
Nadal got to play on slow baseliner friendly grass. Agassi got to play on slick lightning fast grass, with nasty and unpredictable bounches which are nightmarish for a baseliner, vs a slew of monsterous servers and serve and volleyers whose serves, slices, and shots zoomed low along the old slick grass. Of course we have to say Nadal is better than Agassi on grass, since Nadal was much better and more accomplished on todays slow grass he was blessed to get to play on than Agassi was on the old fast grass he played on. However would Nadal have been better than Agassi either had both played in the 90s on the old grass, or had both played today on todays slowed baseliner friendly grass? While we will never be able to prove it, it is quite likely Agassi would have been atleast as strong as Nadal on either one (or in the case of the 90s grass Nadal been atleast as weak, relatively speaking, as Agassi).
Well, it's pretty much impossible to know how Agassi would perform in his peak on slower grass. We do know that he never did well at Wimbledon from 2002 onward (even as he still had some success on hard courts at that age) and that grass is not all about the bounce. Djokovic should love the court speed and bounce at Wimbledon but his movement simply doesn't work as well on grass. The same could happen to Agassi, even if his skill set looks like it should match up well to the speed and bounce of the court. And even if he were
better on slow grass than fast grass, I still highly doubt he'd make five straight finals on the surface.